Public Law expert David Radlett says the Prince Charles letters case has \u2018further enhanced the power of the unelected, unrepresentative and unaccountable judiciary at the expense of Parliament.\u2019<\/p>\n
Commenting on an article in the Guardian, \u2018Prince Charles letters case reinforces profound constitutional principles<\/a>\u2019, David goes on to say: \u2018The majority have disregarded the clear statutory empowerment of the Attorney General to reverse a Freedom of Information finding. There was (and is) no basis in precedent for claiming that any common law principle outweighs a statutory provision (for good or ill).<\/p>\n \u2018As Dicey noted, Parliamentary sovereignty (the supremacy of statute over judge-made law, international law and ‘all the law from every source’ – to pinch the old boast of ‘Current Law’) is the legal embodiment of democracy. The inversion of that principle is the legal embodiment of yet another nail being driven into the coffin of democratic self-government.\u2019<\/p>\n David is a Lecturer in Law at Kent Law School, currently teaching Public Law. Read more about his research and publications on his staff profile<\/a>.<\/p>\n